Box Turtle Bulletin

Box Turtle BulletinNews, analysis and fact-checking of anti-gay rhetoric
“Now you must raise your children up in a world where that union of man and box turtle is on the same legal footing as man and wife…”
This article can be found at:
Latest Posts

Rekers and Roman had sex (kinda)

Timothy Kincaid

May 6th, 2010

What is sex?

Have you ever noticed that the definition of sex isn’t really a problem when it’s all above board. When both parties are legally, emotionally, and socially entitled to do whatever they want, sex includes all sorts of activities. It can be hardcore and involve the exchange of fluids or it can be mild and intimate and involve little actual genital contact. When there’s no guilt to be assigned, sex is whatever lifts your luggage.

But when it is illicit, when cheating and lying gets involved, then sex has very very rigid narrow definitions that let a weasel dance around in declaration of innocence. “I did not have sex with that woman!”

Or, in this case, “Professor Rekers was not involved in any illegal or sexual behavior with his travel assistant.”

The Miami New-Times has now provided additional information about the relationship between Dr. George Rekers and Jo-vanni Roman (who prefers to be identified as “Lucian”), his RentBoy/travel assistant/suitcase lifter.

The male escort hired by anti-gay activist George Alan Rekers has told Miami New Times that the Baptist minister is a homosexual who paid him to provide body rubs, once a day, in the nude, during their ten-day vacation in Europe.

Rekers allegedly named his favorite maneuver the “long stroke” — a complicated caress “across his penis, thigh… and his anus over the butt cheeks,” as the escort puts it. “Rekers liked to be rubbed down there,” he says.

This is probably a lot less hardcore than many folks imagined. And Rekers may insist, “oh, but that isn’t sex, I only paid for a massage.”

But I think that he may only be playing a game of deception. If, indeed, there is nothing untoward about the services for which Lucian was procured, if Rekers truly believes that there was no “sexual behavior”, then why didn’t he simply announce, “I hired the young man to accompany me to Europe to give daily nude massage” and let that statement stand on its own?

Comments

POST COMMENT | COMMENT RSS 2.0

Martin
May 6th, 2010 | LINK

A single stroke across the penis AND the butt? What, was Rekers on a rotisserie?

Jim Burroway
May 6th, 2010 | LINK

I am particularly impressed that “Lucian” has decided to reveal what happened after having learned more about Rekers’ anti-gay activities following a long heart-to-heart conversation with a friend. Lucian is putting a lot at risk — escorts who have a reputation of talking about their work will quickly find their work evaporate. All too often, we take a dim view of sex workers, a view that I find unfair and unwarrented.

Lucian deserves a lot of credit, support and respect, in my view.

Patrick
May 6th, 2010 | LINK

I appreciate the way you put that:

“When there’s no guilt to be assigned, sex is whatever lifts your luggage.”

I once dated a Christian gay man who believed he needed to wait until marriage/partnership to have sex. Sex, in his book, was interestingly limited to only anal intercourse. In his book, anything but the butt was not sex. This self-constructed set of guidelines seemed to be something he felt was the law of the land, yet, appeared to me a system in which his “luggage could be lifted” without him feeling he’d broken a rule.

As you said, “When there’s no guilt to be assigned, sex is whatever lifts your luggage.”

Maurice Lacunza
May 6th, 2010 | LINK

Yup Patrick. I zeroed in on it too. Whatever lifts your luggage is alright by me.

And Lucien could be getting some incredible press from this. I am not sure if he should have broke the code. I don’t know. But,

W B W J R ?

Mark F.
May 6th, 2010 | LINK

“Lucian deserves a lot of credit, support and respect, in my view.”

I strongly disagree. Lucian broke the implicit contract he had with his clients to keep whatever he did with them confidential. If you don’t like that, you shouldn’t be in the “escorting” business.

I’m not defending Rekers, but what Lucian did was unethical. I wouldn’t hire him to mow my lawn.

Lindoro Almaviva
May 6th, 2010 | LINK

if it involved an erection, and Oh that feels good and the explosion of fluids followed by a feeling of release, then the bastard got laid, even if there is no penetration.

So the guy is a cossetted fagot (sorry, but scum like this deserves to be called by the same name they call us in private)

Eddie89
May 6th, 2010 | LINK

Aren’t there big, burly, Russian type women that provide massages and can carry dozens of pieces of luggage, all in one load?

I wonder why Mr. Reckers didn’t hire that type of person?

Surely they too could use some “evangelizing”!

Samuel
May 6th, 2010 | LINK

Sorry, but stroking another man’s penis and anus *is* hardcore despite your bizarre excuses for Rekers. Next we are going to hear that Rekers rimmed the boy, but only in a strictly scientific manner because he feels obligated to instruct young boy’s in hygiene of the penis tip and anus through oral assistance of buddies.

anteros
May 6th, 2010 | LINK

a nude massage with a “long stroke” versus a nude massage with a “happy ending”…or a ted haggard chemically enhanced romp… whatever lifts your luggage.

not once, not twice… the repeat factor, while the hypocrisy continues… that’s probably what prompts exposure. surely rekers, and haggard, were fully aware of the risk of exposure… but that didn’t stop either of them from secretly getting their freak on, or publicly hating on gay people… they just had to carry on doing both… until the time came for them to pay the price for their poor decisions.

i agree, lucian probably broke some confidentiality deal or something. but ethics can get pretty complicated, and sometimes breaching a confidentiality agreement is necessary for a higher ethical stand to be taken… take for example, abusive therapists or pastors who bank on confidentiality agreements to continue preying on those who could have been saved from abuse, had a confidentiality agreement been breached earlier. i’m not sure that this is one of those situations… but rekers had it coming. and i think lucian deserves props for exposing rekers’ hypocrisy despite the risks involved.

Jason D
May 6th, 2010 | LINK

“I’m not defending Rekers, but what Lucian did was unethical. I wouldn’t hire him to mow my lawn.”

It boggles my mind that we’re expected to keep the secrets of people who make their livelyhood off of attacking us.

That and the fact that Lucien isn’t permitted to talk about his own life.

Rekers may be closeted, but nobody who has sex with him is under any obligation, stated or implied to lie for him, protect him, or enable his closet.

Jim Burroway
May 6th, 2010 | LINK

I’m not defending Rekers, but what Lucian did was unethical. I wouldn’t hire him to mow my lawn.

Mark F., I’m dumbfounded that you would say that. How many teen suicides do you suppose can be attruibuted to the kind of hateful rhetoric that Rekers has been responsible for over the years?

By the way, I’m pretty sure Nixon thought what “Deep Throat” did was unethical as well.

And on another note, I would totally hire Lucian to mow my lawn! And we don’t even have grass in Arizona.

Jason D
May 6th, 2010 | LINK

Jim, are you sure. Lucien might tell other people what your lawn looks like, and how you like it mowed!

anteros
May 6th, 2010 | LINK

not just the hypocrisy… but the acrobatic cover ups… i know i’d find it really difficult to keep my mouth shut while rekers attempted to deceive the public, blurting out all kinds of b.s. about luggage and the gospel and loving homosexuals… especially considering the dirty details behind all that b.s.

anteros
May 6th, 2010 | LINK

Jason D:

lol! too funny:)

Burr
May 6th, 2010 | LINK

I’d say he had a higher ethical calling to out this effing bastard than to respect the ethics of his profession (it’s certainly fair enough that he will no longer be able to work as a rentboy as a result, not arguing that). Bravo to him. Don’t turn him into another Mike Jones.

TheraP
May 6th, 2010 | LINK

If you read the law about what constitutes sexual assault (NOT that consensual behavior is assault), you’ll see how the law defines it. You’ll find that the legal definition talks about touching or rubbing someone in certain erotic areas of the body, whether clothed or unclothed, in such a way as to arouse the person. Reker clearly wanted sexual contact. And he paid for that. If Reker has ever done such behavior to a client of his or anyone else (against their will) then that would be considered sexual assault. Thus, to pay for it, is “sexual” behavior – no matter how the guy tries to squirm out of this situation. And Johns, as know, are being targeted in certain communities and countries.

John in the Bay Area
May 6th, 2010 | LINK

Rekers hired this guy to have sex for pay. That is illegal activity. When engaged in illegal activity, there is no expectation of privacy between the two participants. I find it odd that the prostitute spoke out due to prosecution concerns. Since the acts occurred overseas (maybe), he might be less concerned about prosecution. If the payments and the deal were all in Florida, I am not so sure he isn’t still at risk.

Engaging the services of a prostituute is a far cry from engaging the services of a doctor or lawyer.

Jim Burroway
May 6th, 2010 | LINK

At my age, I’m beyond worrying about what my lawn looks like. But for the record, I much prefer that my lawn is mowed in long strokes. I hate short chops.

Jim Burroway
May 6th, 2010 | LINK

John in the Bay Area:

I think Lucian has been extremely careful to walk a tightrope in describing his view that Rekers is gay without actually admitting directly to breaking any laws against prostitution.

It’s the standard disclaimer: The money is only for time and companionship (and lifting luggage, as the case may be). Whatever else happens is up to the two of them as consenting adults. So when Lucian describes what he and Rekers did together while Rekers was nude, he’s putting that in the second category rather than the first.

It also appears that this is the same disclaimer that Rekers is trying to exploit as well. He only hired Lucian to lift his luggage, and he’s sticking to it.

Richard Rush
May 6th, 2010 | LINK

Mark F. said, “Lucian broke the implicit contract he had with his clients to keep whatever he did with them confidential. . . I’m not defending Rekers, but what Lucian did was unethical. I wouldn’t hire him to mow my lawn.

Mark, I assume that you also viewed Mike Jones as unethical for exposing Ted Haggard, right? My partner and I were so pleased and gratified that we sent Jones $100 shortly after the story broke as a tangible appreciation of his ethical standards. This was at a time when gay-rights groups were distancing themselves from him because, after all, he was just a prostitute.

I’m pleased that Lucian is beginning to talk, but there are risks if he continues, and I doubt that he has the wherewithal to sort it all out. So, I hope he is receiving some good advice.

Brody Levesque
May 6th, 2010 | LINK

Washington
May 6th, 2010

In reading these comments as well as those left at Joe.My.God in regard to this emerging story, I offer the following observations:
Foremost is the fact that irrespective of Dr. Reker’s obvious proclivities for hiring lithe & attractive young males for companionship, whether or not sexual contact was involved, lies the problem that his so-called pronouncements & alleged ‘expert’ opinions have wrought serious damages to a substantial population of LGBT folk.

The arguments that I am hearing regarding Jo-Vanni Roman’s plying the craft of prostitution are frankly ludicrous and disingenuous and hold no bearing on the subject matter at hand which is Dr. Reker’s hypocrisy.

Yesterday, in an interview on The Michelangelo Signorile Show, Joe Jervis, publisher of the Joe.My.God blogsite, noted that there was inherent wrong in disclosing Jo-Vanni’s identity and had held off until he realised that another website had revealed it. Then he did, reluctantly.
Of course, by the end of the day, The Advocate had not only published the young man’s real name but a picture taken from Roman’s Facebook page as well.

As a journalist, I can tell you that in this particular instance that no damage was in fact done reasoned upon the facts that Roman had no expectations to privacy due to his openly advertising on a known webpage offering his services as an escort which reasonable human beings accept as a euphemism for a prostitute/sex worker.
Coupled with the fact that he then agreed to participate in the interview process with journalists from the Miami NewTimes Newspaper. [Bullock & Thorp]

The principal target of the investigative correspondent’s was in fact Rekers, however, by proxy and his contractual agreement with Rekers, Roman is an integral part of the story. It is therefore well within the confines of the ethics, standards, and practises of journalism to disclose and include facts relevant to the story that include him as well.

Finally, the principal problem that created the very basis for this issue in the first instance is that religious puritanism that has created deeply flawed individuals like Rekers.

I find no fault with Jo-Vanni’s actions nor do I find fault with his craft as a means of support. Human beings are sexual creatures and as such need to seek out sexual relief and intimacy. This is a fact… What is unnatural is the morality imposed by a minority based on dubious religious doctrines that create an environment where by natural sexual orientations and urges are demonised, and person’s such as Jo-Vanni are subject to disdain and ostracized for providing a service that may be the only outlet for some.

The demon here is religion which creates persons like Rekers, and hurts folks like Jo-Vanni Roman.

I condemn Rekers but with understanding to a point. I do not agree however that bashing young Roman serves any purpose whatsoever.

Brody Levesque

Maurice Lacunza
May 6th, 2010 | LINK

Well stated and well said, Brody.

Leave A Comment

All comments reflect the opinions of commenters only. They are not necessarily those of anyone associated with Box Turtle Bulletin. Comments are subject to our Comments Policy.

(Required)
(Required, never shared)

PLEASE NOTE: All comments are subject to our Comments Policy.